Monday, June 30, 2014

The Roberts Supreme Court issued two decisions today that are essentially sheep in wolf's clothing. That is, they are intended to look like originalist decisions that support the Constitution, but they are so hedged and nuanced as to be almost meaningless.

One of the cases, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is fairly well known. The issue here was whether the Obama Administration could require a corporation or other institution ( such as a Catholic University) to include abortificants and other contraceptive items required by ObamaCare in violation of its religious principles.

The other was Harris v. Quinn, where the matter in question was whether home health care workers, many of whom take care of disabled relatives are required to kick in an 'agency fee' for negotiating pay and benefits to public employee unions even if the workers involved are not members of the union and do not want to join or support the union.

Let's look at Harris vs. Quinn first, which was PR'ed as a 'death blow' to public employee unions. Nothing could be further from the truth. What the Court did here was to rule so narrowly that it avoided the essential issue.

Pamela Harris gets paid to take care of her developmentally disabled son in Illinois, which made a deal with the SEIU as the union of choice to collect those 'fees'. She challenged the state's right to designate a union of public employees as their sole representative.

In a 1977 ruling, Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, the Court ruled that public employee Unions could collect such fees but not use them for political activities, although pro-labor politicians made sure that there was little or no oversight to give it any teeth.

The argument for Ms. Harris was a simple First Amendment one - whether the compulsory fees violated her right of free speech, since the State of Illinois was in essence forcing her to support an organization, the SEIU, whose politics she disagreed with.

That was the essential issue, and anyone who understands the Constitution knows that compelling someone to support politics they disagree with - say, spending $40 million dollars to get Barack Obama elected president-as a condition of employment violates their First Amendment rights.

Yet so ingrained is the Ponzi scheme by which the Democratic party funds itself through forced contributions from public employee union paychecks paid for by the public and then 'negotiates' pay and benefits with the very people that put them in office that she actually lost in a couple of th elower courts and had to appeal.

The Court sidestepped that by ruling that only home care workers were exempted and noting in the decision that prior rulings legalizing this enforced levy from workers and from taxpayers could continue. The obvious question no one's asking is that if Ms. Harris' rights were deemed violated, aren't the rights of a janitor or a clerk's who likewise has to kick in to support the union's political agenda? This was a chance for a sweeping ruling that would have defended the First Amendment the Court deliberately avoided. Since it was 5-4, I suspect Chief Justice John Robert's hand in this.

At best, this may be a precedent to take down public employee unions like the SEIU and AFSCME and end their racket at a later date.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby was an even bigger example of deliberately avoiding the defense of a clear constitutional principle.

The Court never even bothered to go near the main argument, the fact that by requiring Hobby Lobby to provide abortificants and contraceptives as part of the ObamaCare mandate the free practice clause of the First Amendment was being urinated on. Instead, they again narrowed down their ruling to the point that it was meaningless. First, they limited the things Hobby Lobby need not pay for to three specific abortificants, most notably the morning after pill. Upon ''certifying that it opposes contraceptive coverage', the insurance company involved is required to provide these items 'for free', which of course means that Hobby Lobby will still be paying for them because they will be figured into the premium the insurance company charges them!

What we're talking about is an average cost for these items of around $9 a month over the counter - without any insurance offset.

What everyone seems to want to avoid is that contraception, like sex itself, is a choice. In fact, that's really what both these decisions were about. Who chooses? Is it government or the individual? And does the government have the right to force such basic choices on people? Who you have to pay off as a condition of employment? What you have to provide as an employer beyond the obvious realms of a safe working environment and an agreed upon rate of pay no matter what your principles? Would the Court have ruled, for instance, that Muslims are to be required to handle pork and alcohol if that's part of their job requirement? Isn't that the same principle, the free practice of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment? Obviously not anymore. Welcome to Obama's America.

The Roberts Court is going to be remembered for its cowardice and willingness to punt rather than the exercise of what is supposedly its job, to interpret and rule on the Constitution.

And the fact that this was yet another 5-4 decision doesn't bode well for our liberties.Not at all.

President Obama, in remarks today in the Rose Garden said he was 'tired of waiting for Congress' and will push through amnesty by what he referred to as 'a summer of executive action' .

This particular temper tantrum came, reportedly, after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told him last week that he would not allow a vote on immigration, umm, amnesty for illegal migrants this year:
“Our country and our economy would be stronger today if House Republicans had allowed a simple yes-or-no vote on this bill or, for that matter, any bill,” Obama said, raising his voice. “Instead they’ve proven again and again that they’re unwilling to stand up to the tea party in order to do what’s best for the country. And the worst part about it is, a bunch of them know better.” {...}

“Speaker Boehner told the president exactly what he has been telling him: The American people and their elected officials don’t trust him to enforce the law as written,” said Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman. “Until that changes, it is going to be difficult to make progress on this issue.”

They don't trust President Barack Hussein Obama to enforce the law???? My my, I wonder why that might be?

What will likely happen is typical Obama. A full load of horse manure about 'enforcement' with zero action accompanied by an expansion of his 2012 executive order implementing the DREAM Act a bipartisan congress rejected three times, and extremely loosened regulations on 'asylum for refugees'. As we've already seen, there are 'cheat sheets circulating south of our borders telling people exactly what to say to be considered for asylum status, and it's obvious that a large number of people have been coached and rehearsed on exactly what to tell the Border Patrol.

It is this administration's disregard for our immigration laws that is causing this surge. And why not? They've been given every expectation that they're going to be given amnesty, complete with all the freebies of generous welfare state at someone else's expense. That's unsustainable.

With the midterms upcoming, even Democrats have to be thinking about what this entails for them. It's time this lawless presidency was stopped.

President Obama finally saw fit to interrupt a golf game and issue a very measured statement regarding the kidnapped Israeli teens, now that their bodies have been found:

"On behalf of the American people I extend my deepest and heartfelt condolences to the families of Eyal Yifrach, Gilad Shaar, and Naftali Fraenkel – who held Israeli and American citizenship," Obama said in a statement Monday. "As a father, I cannot imagine the indescribable pain that the parents of these teenage boys are experiencing."

He urged the Palestinian Authority and the Israelis to work together to find the murderers (as if the PA has ever once arrested a Palestinian for killing Jews) and finished up, of course, by telling Israel that Jewish blood, is after all cheap. "I also urge all parties to refrain from steps that could further destabilize the situation," he said.

This, while Hamas is raining rockets on Israel from Gaza while the West funds them.

British PM David Cameron also weighed in.
"I am deeply saddened by the news that the bodies of the three Israeli boys kidnapped on 12 June have been found this evening," Cameron said in a statement. "This was an appalling and inexcusable act of terror perpetrated against young teenagers. Britain will stand with Israel as it seeks to bring to justice those responsible."

"Tonight my thoughts and prayers are with the families of Gilad, Naftali and Eyal," Cameron added. "No parent should have ever to suffer such heartache or grief."

Compare these statements with that of Ed Royce (R-CA), Chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, who said that the perpetrators must be "held accountable" for the act:

"The brutal murder of these boys should leave the Administration with no illusion that a Hamas-backed Palestinian government will be a partner for peace. With these killings, the genocidal intent of Hamas has been laid bare yet again.”

If President Obama or PM Cameron actually felt anything, they'd be giving Mahmoud Abbas an ultimatum: 'give up the unity deal with Hamas or lose our financial support'. I guarantee you they won't do anything of the kind. Instead, they want Israel to 'exercise restraint ' as its children are murdered
and as Hamas fires rockets at its civilians.

Meanwhile, Israel's 'peace partner Mahmoud Abbas is a busy man. As Israeli-Arab reporter Khalid al-Toameh tweeted,Abbas wants the U.S. and the EU to step on Israel to prevent any retaliation for the murders:

The bodies of Eyal Yifrach, 19; Gilad Shaar, 16; and Naftali Frenkel, also 16 (Z"l) were found today near the Arab village of Halhul, just north of Hebron. The bodies were in an open field in a shallow grave. One of my sources conformed that the graves appear to have been hurriedly dug. This person also confirmed for me that pathologists on the scene confirmed that the teens were murdered soon after they were abducted, and that the bodies were not in good condition and showed signs of abuse.

The parents were notified last night.

The Israelis have already named two suspects, Amer Abu Aysha (left) and Marwan Kawasme (right) both of whom are Hamas operatives and were freed as part of the ransom for kidnapped Israel soldier Gilad Shalit. Both had told their employers ahead of time that they wouldn’t be at work for a few days and both have been missing from their homes in Hebron’s Hares neighborhood ever since the kidnapping took place on the night of June 12. In addition, one of my sources told me that the Israelis have clear forensic evidence linking these two to the kidnapping, most likely from the abandoned car used in the crime that was set on fire. Rest assured that they will be found, although I'm sure there are others involved as well.

It has been over three weeks since these boys were kidnapped. President Obama has yet to say a word about it, even though one of the boys, Naftali Frankel, was an American citizen. As for the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians, I'm sure the usual celebrations will be forthcoming. More on this shortly.

Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question:Which Should America Choose - Shi'ites, Sunnis or Neither?

The Independent Sentinel: We need to bomb ISIS. We should have bombed them a month ago when they were on the Syria-Iraq border. They must be stopped. They present an existential threat to the United States and her allies. I don't view it as taking sides. We need to halt or slow their advance. I don't care about Sunnis. Shias - I care about whoever threatens the US and Israel. I'd like to see us arm the Kurds to the hilt. We most definitely should not work with Iran - that's an insane idea.

Robert Avrech, Seraphic Secret: I spoke to an Israeli intelligence officer the other day and asked what the IDF was thinking about the Sunni-Shia war. His response was simple and instructive: "They have been killing each other for centuries. There is no side to pick. Only pinpoint strategic and tactical opportunities from which to choose. For Israel this might be a good time to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities. We have written off America under Obama. We will do it ourselves. Watch the skies.”

Easier said than done - see, ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) is essentially the “lead dog” of a larger Sunni militant coalition.

ISIS has been fighting in conjunction with a number of other Iraqi Sunni militant groups. Effectively the entire rogue’s gallery of Sunni militias from the 2006-2008 civil war have been revived by Prime Minister Maliki’s alienation of the Sunni Arab community since 2011. AQI, the Naqshbandis, the Ba’th, Jaysh al-Muhammad, Ansar al-Sunnah, and all of the rest are back in operation in Iraq, in at least tacit cooperation with a number of Sunni tribes.

Of greatest importance, we need to recognize that the Iraqi Security Forces are fast becoming little more than a Shia militia. This trend began 3-4 years ago when Prime Minister Maliki began to push Sunni and Kurdish officers out of the armed forces, to replace them with loyal Shia officers. As a result, even before the current debacle, the ISF had become far more Shia than it had been, with fewer and fewer Sunnis and Kurds. Even before the dramatic events of last week, most Sunnis and Kurds referred to the ISF as “Maliki’s militia.”

Since last Tuesday, we have seen large numbers of Sunni Arab and Kurdish soldiers desert the ISF, leaving an even more homogeneously Shia force. There are still Sunnis and Kurds in the ranks and in the officer corps, but that seems likely to dissipate over time.

The selective and careful use of air assets is appropriate and necessary to blunt the advance and bottle up elements into isolated pockets if possible, or break the lines of supply and command, at minimum.

With Syrian, US, Iranian forces (and possibly others, the Saudis) already in the airspace defined areas of operation and rules of engagement need to quickly come about. Base our air assets in Kurdistan and hit the staging areas and logistics centers. Refine the approach to personality/decapitation tactics after intel is back on its feet. Make the Sunnis choose between a state and a state of war.

JoshuaPundit: Just to show you what sort of creature we elected, this president and his dysfunctional team think they can choose both! On the one hand Secretary Kerry is asking congress for half a billion of your tax dollars to arm and train 'the Syrian Rebels', which is exactly how ISIS got so strong.

At the same time, we now have over 600 'advisers' in Iraq fighting against ISIS,which means we're fighting on the same side as Assad, Hezbollah, Iran and Moqtaddah al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, all of them with substantial American blood on their hands to help Iran hang on to the colony under Maliki we handed them at the cost of a trillion dollars and over 4,000 lives. We're already working with the Iranians, we're simply using Maliki as an intermediary. And we're also bolstering Putin's status, of course, who just sent Maliki a dozen Sukhoi-25 fighter planes.Which also pits us against our other allies the Saudis, Qatar and the other QCE countries who are arming, funding and training the Syrian rebels!

The only consistent policy in the Middle East this president and his minions have is hysterics when Israelis builds houses for their people and support and appeasement of Islamists at home and abroad. These folks could screw up a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and turn it into something sickening and lethal. Literally everything they touch turns to crap.

The situation in the Middle East is the same story. Barack Hussein Obama was sold to the American people as the smartest guy in the room ( with Joe Biden for - wait for it - gravitas) who was going to restore good relations with all our allies. Remember that? The reality is that none of our allies trust us today, and both they and our adversaries justifiably regard this president as a bumbling. duplicitous weakling whose word and commitments are worthless.

That's a big part of the problem, by the way. Several people in this Forum have mentioned putting bases in Kurdistan. That would have worked just fine when we still occupied the country and the Kurds begged us to do it. Instead, President George W. Bush sold them out for Maliki and the likes of Turkey's Tayyip Erdoğan and actually pulled our military out of position so the Turks could bomb their villages and sent troops across the border to rape and pillage. And President Obama responded to the complaints of the Kurds and Sunnis as Maliki purged them from the military, stole elections and reneged on the federation agreement with total indifference. Seeing as we're helping Maliki and the Iranians, does anyone think the Kurds trust us now? Neither do the Sunnis, after we used them in the Awakening Movement to fight al-Qaeda and then let Maliki and the Shi'tes have their way with them after we left. And what are the odds that we're actually going to arm the Kurds or put bases there when our new 'allies' Iran and Maliki as well as Obama's BFF Tayipp Erdoğan are against it?

This is harsh stuff, but it's reality. We have no business picking sides in this conflict when our president's actions have already ensured that we lose out either way. In fact, the one successful path is to do absolutely nothing:

Both sides love carnage and a war to the knife for Allah, and since Iran now has boots on the ground, we can sit back and watch as they savage each other. The last time it happened, an 8 year bloodbath back in the 1980's, there were over a million battlefield deaths and both sides were weakened ..at least until we stupidly took Saddam Hussein out of the equation, the regional counterweight to Iran.The idea of the Iranians, Hezbollah, the Mahdi Army and ISIS engaging in this fashion is fine with me and as ISIS is going to be a tough nut to crack, Iran could end up being tangled in Syria and Iraq for years.

Of course, this nonsense with Iraq is causing us to ignore our real security problem in the region, Iran's rogue nuclear program. The Iranian nuclear talks are stalled, of course, while the Ayatollahs play for time. So the major threat to our security in the region isn't being addressed at all, because they're playing Our Dear Leader and John Kerry like Jimi Hendrix used to play a stratocaster.

There is, of course, a perfectly good solution to dealing with Iran's nuclear ambitions:

We now have two successive presidents who have known full well what the Ayatollahs were up to and failed to do anything about it, even though both of them did a lot of chest thumping. That's the main threat to U.S. security we have in the region, and the job is going to be a lot more costly and destructive because of their delays and their failure.

At this point both the Iranians and our allies know that Barack Hussein Obama isn't going to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. In fact, he probably welcomes the idea. Our best hope is that (a)either the Iranians get tangled up enough in Iraq and Syria to delay things, (B)this president is either impeached or out of office before things get critical or (c) one of our allies decides enough is enough and does the job for us.

I say we choose neither,

The Razor: There is no way we should get involved – at least until ISIS is in the process of attacking American interests abroad or at home. Given our intelligence failures, which amazes me considering how much data we scoop up through electronic surveillance, it may be impossible to know this until it is too late. Unfortunately that means suffering an attack. But until that attack happens we should let the Sunnis and Shi’a do what they do best: kill each other. Supporting one side just makes us a target for both sides (if that sounds contradictory just look at what happened in Afghanistan when our attacks on the Taliban were decried as attacks on civilians by the Afghani president Hamid Karzai.)

A pox on both their houses.

Ask Marion : I keep wrestling with this question and myself regarding it… What should we do in Iraq? Who should we support? How does it affect the Middle East… Israel? And what do we owe those who died or have lifetime severe injuries because of their service… and do we subject more troops to the same?

The more I think about, the more torn I am! But I think we have already jumped the shark when we pulled out without leaving enough troops and needed assistance to help the Iraqis do what they needed to do to hold the line and to become self-sustaining in the areas of defense and maintaining a Democratic nation.

After listening to all the experts, the general consensus seems to be that it is too late unless we want to start from scratch… a new full offensive, for which there is now support.

So at this point with all the internal problems we have I think we should maintain a low profile and what little we do offer or decide to do should be done with forethought and clarity… instead of sending advisers, drones, air support or anything else without a plan.

As Brigitte Gabrielle says:
Our elected and appointed officials must come to terms with the doctrinal basis for jihad so we can properly and effectively defend America, protect American lives and face our enemies.

So, what should we do in Iraq? We need to pray for Israel and help them survive. We should have stopped Obama from pulling out of both Iraq (and Afghanistan) completely… and now we, the Middle East and the rest of the world will pay for our foolishness and weakness as the radicals have been emboldened to move forward with their worldwide Islamic Caliphate… which has always been their goal.

The Glittering Eye : Neither. Recently our track record has been very poor--either picking the wrong factions or the wrong individuals to back. We should've swallowed hard and allowed Qaddafi to prevail in Libya, the military in Egypt, and Assad in Syria. Instead we've got chaos in Libya, less influence than we had in Egypt, increased carnage in Syria, and Iraq is now on the verge of collapse.

Rather than siding with factions or individuals we should be doing what little we can (and it's admittedly little) to foster institutions in the countries of MENA. Institutions like a free press and an independent court.

At the very least we need to stop supporting Islamists.

Well, there you have it.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?

Sunday, June 29, 2014

A group of prominent American Jews were invited to attend the 23rd African Union Summit in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea this week, with the idea of working on logistical and financial support for educational,humanitarian and development projects in Africa from mainstream Jewish groups like the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.On the agenda and scheduled to open the conference was a simple statement, a declaration of support for the three kidnapped Israeli teens.

The Jews were not allowed to attend, and the story points out something valuable to remember:
"I have never seen such racism, such anti-Semitism. We were humiliated," said several of the Jews in attendance, who had left Equatorial Guinea in a fury after changing their flights.

"It all began when one of the Arab delegates, from Egypt, approached us at dinner the night before the opening and asked what we were doing here, pointing at the men wearing kippahs," said Israeli businesswoman Yardena Ovadia, who had organized the invitation of the Jewish delegation to the summit.

Ovadia, who has close ties with Equatorial Guinea President Teodoro Obiang, said that she explained to the delegate that her and her friends were Jews from the US, not Israelis.

The following day representatives of the Arab League refused to enter the hall until all the Jews left, or as they called them, the "Israeli delegation."

"We were already seated in the conference hall," said Ovadia. "The heads of the Arab League announced a boycott of the conference until the 'Israeli delegation' left. We officially declared that we were Americans, not Israelis, but it didn't help."

"There was a representative of the US congress with us. She was shocked and said that there will be an official government statement," Ovadia added.

Notice that the first default position of these American Jews and this Israeli-American businesswoman was to try to distance themselves and declare that they were Americans, not those 'evil' Israelis.

To the Arab League delegates, that made absolutely no difference. It also apparently didn't make any difference to UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, Egyptian President al-Sisi, the prime minister of Spain, four Iranian ministers, and other foreign dignitaries in the hall.

None of them said a word as the 14 Jewish delegates were forced to leave the hall and the proceedings started an hour late. Nor did any of them say anything or walk out either when the Palestinian Authority's unelected dictator Mahmoud Abbas' deputy made a speech accusing Israel of perpetrating a 'Holocaust' on the Palestinian people. And that declaration of support for the three kidnapped Israeli teens? If these people couldn't even abide being in the same room with Jews, do you think that ever happened? Of course it didn't. It never even made it to the floor and was cancelled from the agenda.

And some of these people are the same one who accuse Israel of 'apartheid'! Yes, it's the old story again, 'Jews Unwelcome.' And the usual suspects still keep their mouths shut.

The supreme irony here is that the Israelis have given billions in badly needed aid to African nations, unlike the Arab countries with their billions of petro-dollars. That likely has a lot to do with why the president of Equatorial Guinea called Yardena Ovadia personally to apologize and invite the Conference of Presidents' delegation to a special dinner. But at that point, they had already rescheduled their flight and had left the country.

Believe or not this is a positive development. These American Jews, who thought themselves apart from their Jewish brothers and sisters in Israel may have learned, perhaps, that 'anti-Zionist' is just a code word for anti-Semite. To these people all Jews are 'Israelis', no matter how politically correct they are, how critical they are of Israel's policies or how much 'interfaith outreach' they do with Islamists.

Friday, June 27, 2014

President Obama's response to the crisis on our southern border that he precipitated is unfortunately typical of this regime. He's having his minions signal that he plans to ignore our laws and impose de facto amnesty for illegal aliens on America.

New White House press secretary Josh Earnest (there's an ironic misnomer for you) told MSNBC's Chuck Todd exactly that today in an interview:

“[W]e’re not just going to sit around and wait interminably for Congress,” he explained. “We’ve been waiting a year already. The president has tasked his Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson with reviewing what options are available to the president, what is at his disposal using his executive authority to try to address some of the problems that have been created by our broken immigration system.”

Earnest added that, although Obama was planning executive orders, he'd much rather have congress take the onus for him. And that was echoed strategically by other regime surrogates.

Senator Robert Menendez ( D-NJ) took care to threaten the Republicans that the president intends to override them by diktat.
"We're at the end of the line," Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said Thursday during a press briefing in the Capitol. "We're not bluffing by setting a legislative deadline for them to act.

"Their first job is to govern," Menendez added, "and in the absence of governing, then you see executive actions."

Senator Dick Durbin ( D-IL) aided in the 'message sending' as well.

"I don't know how much more time he thinks he needs, but I hope that Speaker Boehner will speak up today," Durbin said. "And if he does not, the president will borrow the power that is needed to solve the problems of immigration."

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking Democrat in the senate completed the trifecta,telling anyone who'll listen that all this can be solved very easily...all the House Republicans have to do in cave in on amnesty. He said Boehner and other Republican critics of Obama's executive actions have "a very good antidote" for their fears: "Put a bill on the floor."

"He's, like, shooting his parents and then throwing himself on the mercy of the court as an orphan," Schumer said. "Pass a bill, and that won't happen.

"If they don't bring any bill to the floor, the president has no choice — on a humanitarian basis and on a policy basis — to act where he can on his own," Schumer added.

I have seldom heard such outright lies pass the lips of public servants. Especially from Schumer, who isn't stupid in the least.There are over 250 bills that the House has presented to the senate for action that have not been allowed to go to committee, let alone a vote, because Majority leader Harry Reid won't allow the senate to act on them in any way.Talk about congressional inaction, they're just sitting there in limbo. And Schumer, at least, knows it.

What the regime's surrogates are saying is that the House Republicans either pass the ridiculous Senate bill supporting amnesty or craft one of their own that does essentially the same thing, because Harry Reid won't even allow any other kind of bill into the senate. If the Republicans refuse, the threat is that the president will ignore the law and do what he wants anyway.

A good part of this is House Speaker John Boehner's fault. President Obama has blatantly ignored the separation of powers in many instances, not just our immigration laws. Believe it or not, Boehner is only getting around to suing him over that now, six years on.

There's the spin from this president's apologists that he has deported more illegal aliens than any other president. But when you look at how 'deportations' are figured since President Obama took over, you find that even people caught illegally crossing the border and turned back are added to those numbers. In reality, Obama's Department of Justice has been declining to prosecute the majority of illegal aliens for some time, even in many cases where a court was fully prepared to issue a deportation order Th eObama Administration has been deliberately not pursuing the over 600,000 illegal aliens who actually have deportation orders and are running loose, winking at local jurisdictions in places like California that do not enforce or cooperate with the enforcement of our immigration laws while suing states like Arizona that do, hand cuffing our Border Patrol and 'prioritizing' enforcement of our laws so that illegal aliens guilty of crimes like drunken driving, fraud, sexual assaults and theft are not prosecuted for breaking our immigration laws and deported.

The entire perception this gives to anyone wanting to jump our border without going through legal channels is that amnestia is right around the corner, there are lots of freebies to be had and you won;t be sent back, so that now is the time to make the move. This president's illegal implementation of the DREAm Act after both houses of congress refused to pass it three times and his 2012 deferred action program, which halted deportations of qualified illegal immigrants brought to the United States as children were just a reiteration of that message, and are directly responsible for the chaos on our border.

Right now, instead of doing the job they were supposedly hired for, Border Patrol Agents are involved in shepherding illegal aliens to various makeshift facilities around the country, doing laundry and doling out meals and clothing.A number of the agents have already tested positive for exposure to infectious diseases.

In the Rio Grande Valley Sector of the border alone, over 181,000 illegal aliens have already crossed border since October 2013..and the number could be considerably higher.The McAllen, Texas Border patrol station was built to hold 380 people. It’s currently housing more than 1,100.

And it's not just people looking for work or to latch on to what they see as the coming amnesty and it's accompanying freebies. criminal elements from south of the border are also taking advantage of the surge.

A president who cared anything at all about the laws, about upholding his oath of office, or even about protecting the citizens of the country he supposedly works for would have ordered the National Guard to the borders to help police them and would have already spoken to the Mexican government about its responsibilities in the matter.

That's not the man we have in the Oval Office right now.

It's high time the House brought impeachment charges against Barack Hussein Obama.

The Democrats will of course vote against impeaching this president, just as they refused to convict Bill Clinton of obstruction of justice, lying to congress under oath and perjury.But the very fact of investigating these charges and airing them in the public arena will give the American people an opportunity to decide whether they still want President Obama in office. And every Democrat voting to acquit him will have to live with that decision come election time.

Oh, and just for the record? Here is a real solution for our illegal migration and immigration problems that is fair, just, humane and addresses these issues from the standpoint of what benefits America. That's exactly why nothing like this would ever be proposed or enacted by the current congress or signed into law by President Obama.

Alea iacta est! The die is cast, the Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week's Watcher's Council match up.

“When one with honeyed words but evil mind
Persuades the mob, great woes befall the state.” - ― Euripides, Orestes

"Just as every cop is a criminal,And all the sinners saints"..- Mick Jagger,'Sympathy For The Devil'

“Not even mass corruption -- not even a smidgen of corruption.”-President Barack Hussein Obama, talking about the IRS scandal with FOX News' Bill O'Reilly, February 3rd, 2014

We had a tie this week in the Council category which I, as Watcher have to break.

There were a few entries in both categories this week on the IRS' convenient inability to produce former IRS apparatchnik Lois Lerner's e-mails. The Right Planet's About That ‘Server Ate My Emails’ Thing is a detailed and authoritative roundup by someone who knows what he's talking about on exactly why this is so much horse manure on their part, and as someone else said, an excellent indication that congress is looking in exactly the right place to get to the bottom of this disgusting scandal.

It's a much meatier effort than its competitor, Joshuapundit's-How The Palestinians And The Left Are Celebrating The Israeli Kidnappings which is pretty about what it sounds like..the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians celebrating inhumanity and the West's despicable apathy towards the kidnapping of three Israeli teen by Hamas, even as rockets continue to be launched by a member of the new unity government everyone's touting at Israel's civilians. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose, same old same old.

The loss of a personal computer hard drive shouldn’t be able to permanently eliminate emails from a well-run workplace email system. Those emails are run through central email exchange servers, and backups are typically kept using those central exchanges. Add to that Lerner’s prominence in the investigation—she has repeatedly declined to answer questions before Congress, invoking her Fifth Amendment right not to self-incriminate—and the year it took for the IRS to inform the House Ways and Means Committee that the emails were lost in a crash, and the dog-ate-my-emails bit starts to smell rather fishy.

Is the IRS really claiming both the IRS’ mail server and Lois Lerner’s local hard-drive crashed? If the server’s hard-drive failed, that would mean email for everyone within the organization who had an account on that particular mail server would not be able to access their email accounts. Email still being sent from other email accounts on the same mail server that hosted Lois Lerner’s account, and during the same time period that Lerner claims her hard-drive crashed, would indicate the mail server was still operational, despite any misfortune that befell Lerner’s local hard-drive.

System engineers who administer mail servers at the enterprise level will typically strictly follow (and continuously develop) a robust backup plan for all data on mission-critical servers. For most organizations email communication is absolutely essential, if not critical. So, any critical IRS system failures that resulted in long-term outages could potentially create havoc, thus the need to have a comprehensive and redundant backup plan.

Tax software can be extremely complex (thanks to our god-awful progressive tax laws), and must interface with many complex IRS software systems and services. So, don’t tell me the IRS does not have some competent IT staff that can keep their email domains up and running, and their data backed up, according to their own rules and regulations for the retention of data, as prescribed by law.

… U.S. law, specifically 44 U.S.C. Chapter 33, requires that agencies must notify the Archivist of any records that are destroyed and the reasons for destroying them. In addition, federal regulations establish strict recoverability and redundancy requirements. Disposal of records outside these standards requires permission in writing.

The IRS satisfies these requirements through Microsoft Outlook/Exchange systems, which are backed up using Symantec NetBackup. According to the IT specialist, IRS had some of the best people in the federal government charged with making sure these systems work as intended.

Microsoft recommends configuring redundant relational databases (RDMS) with Microsoft Exchange Server. The RDMS (relational database management system) stores and accesses all the email text and metadata housed on the server. Even if the hard-drive(s) fail, the email data is still intact in backup databases. Once a new hard-drive is installed, and the operating system and email server are configured, the data from the replicated databases can be imported into the newly configured mail server.

Many computers nowadays running mail, web, application and database servers run high RAID levels—meaning, the computer (server) has multiple hard-drives that run as backups in case the boot drive fails.

Data retention has been a requirement for years. It is a solved problem. It is simply not credible that IRS, an agency that itself imposes data retention requirements on the general public, would not have a data retention plan, with offsite backups and a generalized disaster recovery framework. Somebody is lying when it comes to Lois Lerner’s “missing emails,” and if this were going on in the private sector, somebody would be at risk of prison.

In our non-Council category, the winner was the one and only Mark Steyn with a great piece on th ee-mails in his own inimitable style, We Don't Need No Stinkin' E-Mails submitted by The Noisy Room. Do read it.

See you next week! Don't forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week's Watcher's Forum, as the Council and their invited guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day and weigh in...don't you dare miss it. And don't forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..'cause we're cool like that!

Thursday, June 26, 2014

Israel has named two of the kidnappers responsible for abducting teenagers Naftali Frenkel, Gilad Shaar and Eyal Yifrach.

They are Hamas operatives Marwan Kawasmeh (29) and Amar Abu-Eisha (33), and both were freed as part of the Shalit deal.Both have been arrested numerous times.

The Shin Bet was originally able to pinpoint them because they have been keeping tabs on the terrorists released in the Shalit deal. They were the only ones unaccounted for

Both had told their employers ahead of time that they wouldn’t be at work for a few days. And both have been missing from their homes in Hebron’s Hares neighborhood ever since the kidnapping took place on the night of June 12. According to one of my sources, there is clear evidence linking these two to the kidnappings, and the Israeli authorities were aware of their involvement for some time.

One possible scenario I'm hearing is that the three teens were lured into helping push a 'broken' car by a single Arab driver who had accomplices lying in wait down the road. That would answer a lot of questions if that's how it went down.

I'm guessing it probably came from the burnt abandoned car that was left behind. It was probably set afire in an attempt to destroy any DNA or other evidence, but apparently the attempt failed.

I obviously was not told this in so many words, but if they're revealing their identities it's likely the IDF knows where the boys are being held, have them boxed in and are trying to get the kidnappers to surrender them alive , perhaps to the Palestinian Authority.I would not be surprised at all if that was being discussed in Ramallah, and as a matter of fact, Israeli PM Netanyahu publicly called on Abbas, Israel's 'peace partner' to prove his bonifides by ditching Hamas and the unity agreement:

“A short time after the kidnapping, I said that those who perpetrated this activity were terrorists of Hamas,” Netanyahu said at an Israeli Air Force graduation ceremony. “And indeed today the security services of Israel have published the names of two of the perpetrators of this heinous crime.”

The prime minister went on to call on Abbas — who, during a recent meeting in Saudi Arabia with foreign ministers from the Muslim world, spoke out against the kidnapping – to bring the reconciliation process with Hamas to a full halt.

“I now expected President Abbas, who said important things in Saudi Arabia, to stand by those words and to break his pact with the Hamas terrorist organization that kidnaps children and calls for the destruction of Israel,” Netanyahu said.

Abbas can't afford to do that politically because of the popularity of Hamas and because they're the ones he plans to turn over 'Palestine' to once the west has legitimized them and it's time for him and the Fatah Old Guard to use their Jordanian passports and take the money they've stolen over the years from their own people to a comfortable retirement elsewhere. But what Netanyahu said needed saying, if only to point out to the West their hypocrisy in funding a terrorist, genocidal organization like Hamas while they kidnapping Israeli children and lobbing missiles at Israel's civilians from Gaza.

Even the Arabs who identify themselves as Palestinians in Gaza and in the areas of Judea and Samaria occupied by the Palestinian Authority apparently understand this contradiction, even if the EU and the Obama Administration turn a blind eye.

In a new poll conducted throughout the Palestinian territories, reportedly conducted by a leading Palestinian pollster commissioned by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy last week, 60 percent of those polled, including 55 percent in West Bank and 68 percent in Gaza, reject permanent acceptance of Israel's existence.

Two-thirds of those polled are in favor of continued “resistance” against Israel. And those who say they support a two-state solution see it a s a strategic device to "take all of Palestine later.”

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy is not exactly a pro-Israel organization either. It was founded by none other than the poisonous Martin Indyk, the Obama State Department’s special envoy during the last attempt by Secretary of State John Kerry to broker peace talks.

In any event, the kidnapping seems to be proceeding towards a climax. Stay tuned and pray as hard as you can for the safe rescue of those three boys.

In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning et al that President Obama's appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in 2012 without Senate confirmation were illegal. The president's excuse at the time was that the Senate was 'in recess' when it actually wasn't, but he simply pushed the appointments through anyway.

The senate sued, and today's ruling was the result.

In a real slap in the face, the majority opinion was written by the most left-leaning justice on the Court, Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. A concurring opinion written by Antonin Scalia was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

"The Recess Appointments Clause empowers the President to fill existing vacancy during any recess—intra-session or inter-session—of sufficient length. A Senate recess that is so short that it does not require the consent of the House under that Clause is not long enough to trigger the President's recess-appointment power."

Justice Stephen Breyer said in his majority opinion that a congressional break has to last at least 10 days to be considered a recess under the Constitution.

Apparently even the left-leaning justices on the court are worried about this president's lawless behavior and disregard for the Constitution he swore to uphold.

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

The United States District Court ruled today that the .ir domain name, along with Iran’s IP addresses
are assets that can be seized to satisfy judgments totaling over a billion dollars, owed by Iran to Israeli and US victims of terrorism perpetrated by Iranian-supported proxies like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah organizations, among others.

The verdict was won by attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of the Shurat Hadin Law Center and what it means is absolutely delicious. The fees paid by Iran to keep its Internet going could be levied and given to the victims, or their lawyers now have to legal right to force an auction of Iran’s Internet assets to help satisfy the judgment.

Shurat Hadin and others have been pursuing Iran in court for over a decade and have obtained numerous judgments against The Islamic Republic which Iran has refused to pay.

Faced with Iranian refusal to provide such compensation, Darshan-Leitner has been pursuing these judgments in the courts. “We’ve been able to seize numerous Iranian assets to satisfy these judgments,” Darshan-Leitner told The Times of Israel. “Last year, for example, we were awarded a building on New York’s Fifth Avenue, and we have a case pending for seizure of an Iranian government-owned art collection at the University of Chicago.”

But today's ruling might end up being the most costly for Iran.

The Iranians, like every other country pay fees to The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), an agency that's part of the US Department of Commerce which administers the World Wide Web. The court ruling today leaves the way clear for those fees Iran pays every year to renew its' domains and its country prefix, .ir to be collected by Sharat Hadin and distributed to the plaintiffs to help satisfy the judgments. Included in the judgment are all the “top-level domain” (TLD) names provided by ICANN to Iran, including the .IR TLD, the Persian-language ایران TLD, and all Internet Protocol (IP) addresses being utilized by the Iranian government and its agencies.

At this point, according to Darshan-Leitner, the only question is how ICAAN is going to respond.They have ten days to do so.

But wait, there's more.

Since ICANN will essentially not be paid its fees since they're going to the terrorism victims, they may simply decide not to do business with Iran anymore. If that happens, ICANN can actually pull the plug on Iran's internet, suspending its use of the .ir domain and disconnecting Iranian IP addresses from the web.

If ICANN decides to carry the Iranians, it gets even worse. Shurat Hadin would likely pursue an auction of the Iranian Internet assets, (which would probably generate a lot more cash) and Iran's websites and domains could be purchased by anyone. The possibilities are endless. Can you imagine the Saudis or the Israelis getting hold of Iran's official government website? And the effect on Iranian commerce would be a disaster.

“The payments are just one aspect of the judgment,” Darshan-Leitner said. “It’s the assets themselves that we were awarded. This is the first time that terror victims have moved to seize the domain names, IPs and Internet licenses of terror-sponsoring states like Iran in an attempt to satisfy their court judgments. The Iranians must be shown that there is a steep price to be paid for their sponsorship of terrorism. In business and legal terms it is quite simple — we are owed money, and these assets are currency worth money. We remain committed to helping these American families satisfy their judgments.”

Well done, Ms. Darshan-Leitner!

UPDATE: I've received a couple of e-mails that mention that the Europeans and EU internet organizations will not go along with this. Au contraire! First of all, EU groups like RIPE are bound by international treaty to be subservient to ICANN when it comes to internet and domain rulings.

And second, almost all European countries have treaties with the U.S. agreeing to reciprocation. That means that we honor financial judgments in those countries' courts as valid in ours, and they do the same for judgments in U.S. courts. As a matter of fact Iran lost a nice chunk of money a couple of years ago when Italian courts honored a U.S. District court judgement and allowed the seizure of two Iranian government bank accounts to help satisfy that judgment.

I also plead guilty to not bothering to run a number of comments like this one ( anonymous, of course):

In a total breakdown of international law, Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, a Jewish attorney, has successfully triggered a judgement by the U.S. district court (which is totally overrun by corrupt Jewish judges) which will allow the seizure of Iran's internet assets via theft of their national .ir web designation.Here is what went down: The Israeli Mossad, in the name of Iran, staged a large number of rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza, which gave Israel the "right" to inflict hundreds of billions of dollars of damage against Palestine in the form of bulldozings and murder campaigns, and as a bonus, provided a front from which a lawsuit could be launched against Iran to steal their assets. Since ICANN, which regulates the web is in America, this theft can be enforced via this court order.This signals an entirely new era of Jewish corruption, if they get away with this I cannot possibly see how the web around the world will survive, and VIOLENCE IS THE ONLY ANSWER. You HAVE TO have a hot war over something like this.

You cannot have a stable world which is so web dependent being subjected to bogus judgements such as this. Into the mix as part of the settlement was the ENFORCED FACT that IRAN DID 911 AND HAD TO PAY REPARATIONS. Yet obviously no mention of Urban Moving systems was made, and the fact that Larry Silverstein himself had explosives planted in building 7 to bring it down, and himself gave the order to do so. The fact that Iran was judged responsible for 911 proves corruption at the highest levels of the American government, where Kikedom is living an orgy of deception and injustice. It cannot get any worse than this.This judgement against Iran is so unjust it amounts to an act of war or a mugging by a crack head, and it is STUNNING NEWS that is NOT BEING REPORTED IN THE MSM.This CANNOT and WILL NOT be reported in the MSM despite it being EARTH SHATTERING NEWS simply because too many people out there know Iran is completely innocent. This means that this court proceeding has to proceed in secrecy the same way antidepressant damage and tainted vaccines are totally not allowed in the press, as is the real truth about Fukushima, nuclear blackmail, and the Japan earthquake. The only way the Jews can get away with a crime this big is to keep it buried entirely.

And I do not believe for a minute that Nitsana Darshan-Leitner believes her case is real, she simply knew she had a corrupt judge available and WENT FOR IT for Israel. And one thing I have learned about thieves is once they discover they can get away with stealing, the thefts increase until they wreak total destruction on the innocent. This could be the end of the web and the end of all pretend global stability, who is next?

When we stop laughing, it's important to realize a little something that's true about 90% plus of the creatures whom call themselves 'anti-ZIonists' or are involved the BDS movement. As the above screed makes clear, when they say 'Israel' they mean Jews. It's simply a more politically correct way of saying it. And that applies to a number of people with Jewish surnames who are part of this movement, or want the viewpoints of people like a Jewish Voice For Peace acknowledged as legitimate 'dialogue'.-Selah-

Democrats constantly fight any kind of voter ID laws or purging of state voter registration rolls of dead people, felons whi have lost their voting rights and people who no longer live in the area, and there's a very good reason why. Fraud is how they win.

The latest interstate voter cross check tallied 6,951,484 overlapping voter registrations, meaning people registered in more than one state. And the cross-check program only monitors 28 states and does not include the three most populous states in the Union, California, Texas and Florida. So the real numbers could be almost double this figure.

“The few conversations that are had about how to shore up these weaknesses are immediately seized on by certain politicians and special-interest groups as fuel to further divide American voters based on trumped-up race and class-based narratives,” she said.

Engelbrecht said the “vicious cycle” can be fixed “if citizens wake up, stand up and refuse to settle for a broken system.”

Illegal migration is another huge source of voter fraud, especially in border states like California with no voter ID laws whatsoever. Usually, this is done through absentee ballots with the names of deceased voters or ones who are no longer living in the area are supplied by 'activists' who get access to the rolls.Now that California is giving drivers' licenses to illegal aliens and allowing the easily obtained (and forged) Mexican Matricula Consular card to be used as a valid ID to obtain one, voter fraud can be expected to increase dramatically.

Voter fraud has been used to disenfranchise American military on active duty, to 'elect' public officials to office and perhaps even to 'pass' some bond issues and initiatives while defeating others.We have no way of knowing exactly how many fraudulent votes were actually cast, because the Obama Department of Justice has consistently refused to investigate the matter or cooperate in any way...although they file suit at every attempt to pass a voter ID law or purge the voting rolls. That's not a coincidence, since in almost all cases, the fraud is perpetrated to assist Democrat candidates and Democrat causes.

This shouldn't even remotely be a partisan issue.I agree with Catherine Engelbrecht; it's time we all stood up regardless of party, screamed bloody murder and demanded the repair of a broken system that perverts our democracy.
.

Sheer, easily debunked horse manure, but sufficient to gin up just enough Democrat turnout in a GOP primary to push a senescent RINO over the top..especially given who this nonsense was aimed at.

Nor am I kidding about the senescent part. the 77-year-old Cochran has been known to suffer surprising memory lapses about things his aides have previously informed him of, and to appear confused at times..and his own words about doing indecent things to animals in his youth also struck a great many people as strange.

Now this is simply power politics, and par for the course, which is why open primaries aren't such a great idea. But what's fascinating is the reaction from the usual suspects.

Democrats and RINOs are hailing Thad Cochran's 'coalition' as the way for 'Republicans to win elections'. You know, endorse amnesty, give up those quaint ideas about small government and fiscal responsibility, appeal to 'moderate Demoicrats' even though 2010 saw most of the congressional Democrats who embodied those principles disappearing.

For these people, here's a question: how many of those Democrats in Thad Cochran's 'coalition' do you think are going to vote for him in November?

Exactly. So the people of Mississippi are going to have to choose between a superannuated tool and whatever Lefty the Democrats put up. Cochran will probably win, but as always, it upsets me no end that Democrats invariably choose their lust for power over the common good.

There actually is something positive to take away from this. Right now, Democrats have a lock on most of the Black vote, even though their policies are disproportionally harmful to America's African-American community. Usually, it's done by outright lies and calls to racial solidarity like the poster above.

If even another 10% or so could be treated not as a minority that needs pandering to but as ordinary Americans with hopes, dreams, and aspirations and shown how small government, low taxes, freedom of choice and reduced government regulations and interference work to their benefit and those of their children, we'd see some major differences.

And part of that, as I know from experience is being willing to show up. As a number of Black conservatives can tell you, the Romney campaign wasn't even courteous enough to show they cared about Black voters by opening campaign offices in their neighborhoods. Or by sending the candidates or at least some credible spokespeople there to talk to these voters and make the case for voting for Romney.

In a far reaching decision that establishes a major precedent for digital privacy, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that warrantless searches of cell phones are unconstitutional except in very narrowly defined circumstances for “exigencies” that arise, such as major security threats.

The case involved was Riley v. California, a case the Court chose out of a group of ten cases involving warrantless searches of cell phones after an arrest.

In a 1973 decision, United States v. Robinson, the Court had ruled that the police can conduct a complete search of an arrestee's person, but they recognized in today's decision that a cell phone represents different territory, as Chief Justice John Roberts explained:

Modern cell phones are not just another technological convenience. With all they contain and all they may reveal, they hold for many Americans “the privacies of life,” Boyd, supra, at 630. The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought. Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.

While Robinson’s categorical rule strikes the appropriate balance in the context of physical objects, neither of its rationales has much force with respect to digital content on cell phones. On the government interest side, Robinson concluded that the two risks identified in Chimel—harm to officers and destruction of evidence—are present in all custodial arrests. There are no comparable risks when the search is of digital data. In addition, Robinson regarded any privacy interests retained by an individual after arrest as significantly diminished by the fact of the arrest itself. Cell phones, however, place vast quantities of personal information literally in the hands of individuals. A search of the information on a cell phone bears little resemblance to the type of brief physical search considered in Robinson.

Justice Roberts wrote that a cell phone could lay bare someone’s entire personal history, from their medical records to their “specific movements down to the minute” and noted that there was a huge difference between asking someone to turn out his pockets versus “ransacking his house for everything which may incriminate him.”
The storage capacity of cell phones has several interrelated consequences for privacy. First, a cell phone collects in one place many distinct types of information—an address, a note, a prescription, a bank statement, a video—that reveal much more in combination than any isolated record. Second, a cell phone’s capacity allows even just one type of information to convey far more than previously possible. The sum of an individual’s private life can be reconstructed through a thousand photographs labeled with dates, locations, and descriptions; the same cannot be said of a photograph or two of loved ones tucked into a wallet. Third, the data on a phone can date back to the purchase of the phone, or even earlier. A person might carry in his pocket a slip of paper reminding him to call Mr. Jones; he would not carry a record of all his communications with Mr. Jones for the past several months, as would routinely be kept on a phone.

This is a huge win for the Fourth Amendment and protection against unusual searches and seizures, and the first victory for an individuals right of privacy in some time.

Welcome to the Watcher's Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the 'sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

Up For Grabs

Our esteemed Council member Elise at Liberty's Spirit has decided to take a long hiatus from blogging and is leaving the group. It has certainly been great having her aboard and all of us wish her the best in her future endeavors.

That does mean, however, that we have a seat on the Council up for grabs. If you think you might be interested or want further details on what's involved, please leave a comment under any story on Joshuapundit complete with your e-mail address (which won't be published, of course) for consideration.

The Council In Action!!

* Tom White at VA Right was interviewed and featured in the Columbia Journalism Review focusing on his knowledge and correct call of the defeat of Rep. Eric Cantor in Virginia by Dave Brat. Good stuff!

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address ( which won't be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out Wednesday morning

Simple, no?

It's a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members. while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?